A Phase of the Church Question. [pp. 566-586]

~72 A Pit((8C (f [Oc~o~~~,
`~ T/te~ wI~oTh cO~~&'8 ~iN~!, (t~(i fo?~?fl8 t1~~ O~~7j? J)()&~fl)i7i(y o~
j)o~&~~iu7 ~~u~on~,for all ~/~cj~a'rlic~~lar cxislc~~cc~ by ~c4ic/t it
W~ bro~y/~~ ~ pa.~'." ~Vi~at does this mean? Dr. Nevin seems
to teach that the universe collies into existence first as a ~holc,
~bich of course must include all its parts; and that this whole
forms tlie "potential reason" for tlie existence of flie partienJar ~~orlds, 5llfl5, and systen~s. This is metapJiysical mvstic~sm,
and as such involves a pantheistic conception of the universe.
" T/~e w/tole CO?flC8 )i)~l." ITow? Christian philosopby
reeo~nizcs t1~e existence of the Personal God anterior to the
the existence of tbe suns and systems constitnting the present
nniverse. To affirm that the whole existed anterior to an
actual creation, is only a confusion of ideas. God existed, and
therefbre the woAds, suns, and systems were created. Plato
inay conft~und an idea with the existence of the Bein~ of God.
No snci~ barbarian philosophy can stand for a i~ioincnt a~nid
tlie light hrou~ht into the world i~y the Son of God. The
Gospel refers the understanding i~n~~e~liately, and not me~NePly, to God manifest in Christ, as the condition as well as the
j~ro~i~~l of all that exists. Aii ideal whole is an abstraction.
Dr. Nevin can have no right, scientific or logical, to try to
conf\-~uiid a hu~uan notion, whatever its character, with that
which is divine.
Tie ic/~ole eo~ie~~r~t." In no sense is tl~is true with regard to Personal ~eing. God is in bimself both tlie ground
and the condition of personality. Dr. Nevin does not seem
to see the pantheistic tendency of liis "idea or theory." Not
a word l~as been found in all he has ever written in which he
has regard to God as the condition of personal existence. This
i~ay explain why be should speak of the w/~oie as being the
"j)Ole)? ti~~l rea&o?~" for ilie particular existences.
Still more. Dr. Nevin mal~es no proper distinction between
life in the sphere of animal nature, and life in the higher world
of personal being. TIe confounds individ~aiity with the infinitely different idea ofpersonality. In this way ljis scheme,
in its last nualysis, brings tiie human down into the sphere of
animal nature. This is the baldest l~ind of panil~cism. Put
lie says: "Certainly I do not confound God with the world,